Evidence-Based Medicine in Otolaryngology, Part XIII: Health Disparities Research and Advancing Health Equity

Inequities Associated With Advanced Stage at Presentation of Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review

Importance

Social determinants of health (SDoH) are defined by a wide range of factors (eg, built environment, economic stability, education level, discrimination, racism, access to health care). Advanced stage at presentation or delayed diagnosis heavily influences health outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). While the drivers of advanced-stage presentation come from a multitude of sources, SDoH plays an outsized role.

Objective

To systematically review the published literature to identify which SDoH are established as risk factors for delayed diagnosis or advanced stage at presentation among patients with HNC.

Evidence Review

In this systematic review, a literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted on February 27, 2023, using keywords related to advanced stage at presentation and delayed diagnosis of HNC between 2013 and 2023. Quality assessment was evaluated through the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Articles were included if they focused on US-based populations and factors associated with advanced stage at presentation or delayed diagnosis of HNC.

Findings

Overall, 50 articles were included for full-text extraction, of which 30 (60%) were database studies. Race was the most commonly reported variable (46 studies [92%]), with Black race (43 studies [93%]) being the most studied racial group showing an increased risk of delay in diagnosis of HNC. Other commonly studied variables that were associated with advanced stage at presentation included sex and gender (41 studies [82%]), insurance status (25 studies [50%]), geographic region (5 studies [10%]), and socioeconomic status (20 studies [40%]). Male sex, lack of insurance, rurality, and low socioeconomic status were all identified as risk factors for advanced stage at presentation.

Conclusions and Relevance

This systematic review provides a comprehensive list of factors that were associated with advanced HNC stage at presentation. Future studies should focus on evaluating interventions aimed at addressing the SDoH in communities experiencing disparities to provide a net positive effect on HNC care.

The Relationship of Climate Change to Rhinitis

Evidence is mounting that climate change is having a significant impact on exacerbations of rhinitis. Concomitantly, the prevalence of allergic rhinitis is increasing at an accelerated rate. We herein explore the impact of carbon dioxide, barometric pressure and humidity changes, and anthropogenic pollutants on aeroallergens and rhinitis hypersensitivity. Important immune mechanisms underlying the climate-driven effects on rhinitis are discussed. Also, climate change is shifting ecological zones and seasons, increasing weather extremes, and altering regional atmospheric and environmental conditions. The direct impact of these factors on promoting allergic and nonallergic rhinitis is reviewed.

Clinical Practice Guideline: Age-Related Hearing Loss

OBJECTIVE

Age-related hearing loss (ARHL) is a prevalent but often underdiagnosed and undertreated condition among individuals aged 50 and above. It is associated with various sociodemographic factors and health risks including dementia, depression, cardiovascular disease, and falls. While the causes of ARHL and its downstream effects are well defined, there is a lack of priority placed by clinicians as well as guidance regarding the identification, education, and management of this condition.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this clinical practice guideline is to identify quality improvement opportunities and provide clinicians trustworthy, evidence-based recommendations regarding the identification and management of ARHL. These opportunities are communicated through clear actionable statements with explanation of the support in the literature, evaluation of the quality of the evidence, and recommendations on implementation. The target patients for the guideline are any individuals aged 50 years and older. The target audience is all clinicians in all care settings. This guideline is intended to focus on evidence-based quality improvement opportunities judged most important by the guideline development group (GDG). It is not intended to be a comprehensive, general guide regarding the management of ARHL. The statements in this guideline are not intended to limit or restrict care provided by clinicians based on their experience and assessment of individual patients.

ACTION STATEMENTS

The GDG made strong recommendations for the following key action statements (KASs): (KAS 4) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should obtain or refer to a clinician who can obtain an audiogram. (KAS 8) Clinicians should offer, or refer to a clinician who can offer, appropriately fit amplification to patients with ARHL. (KAS 9) Clinicians should refer patients for an evaluation of cochlear implantation candidacy when patients have appropriately fit amplification and persistent hearing difficulty with poor speech understanding. The GDG made recommendations for the following KASs: (KAS 1) Clinicians should screen patients aged 50 years and older for hearing loss at the time of a health care encounter. (KAS 2) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should examine the ear canal and tympanic membrane with otoscopy or refer to a clinician who can examine the ears for cerumen impaction, infection, or other abnormalities. (KAS 3) If screening suggests hearing loss, clinicians should identify sociodemographic factors and patient preferences that influence access to and utilization of hearing health care. (KAS 5) Clinicians should evaluate and treat or refer to a clinician who can evaluate and treat patients with significant asymmetric hearing loss, conductive or mixed hearing loss, or poor word recognition on diagnostic testing. (KAS 6) Clinicians should educate and counsel patients with hearing loss and their family/care partner(s) about the impact of hearing loss on their communication, safety, function, cognition, and quality of life (QOL). (KAS 7) Clinicians should counsel patients with hearing loss on communication strategies and assistive listening devices. (KAS 10) For patients with hearing loss, clinicians should assess if communication goals have been met and if there has been improvement in hearing-related QOL at a subsequent health care encounter or within 1 year. The GDG offered the following KAS as an option: (KAS 11) Clinicians should assess hearing at least every 3 years in patients with known hearing loss or with reported concern for changes in hearing.

Disparities in the Presentation and Management of Pediatric Retropharyngeal Abscess

OBJECTIVES

Differences in management and outcomes of otolaryngologic diseases may reflect inequities driven by social determinants of health. This study aimed to investigate disparities in presentation and outcomes of retropharyngeal abscess (RPA) among 231 pediatric patients.

METHODS

Medical records were searched for pediatric patients with RPA from 2010 to 2021. Charts were reviewed for demographics, clinical features, and treatment decisions. Area deprivation index (ADI) scores for patient zip codes were determined. Chi-square analysis independent samples t-test, and regression analyses were used to investigate associations between variables.

RESULTS

Among patients presenting for RPA, Black patients were less likely to undergo surgical management than non-Black patients (53.2% vs. 71.6%, p = 0.009). Black patients had a lower rate of treatment with antibiotics prior to hospital admission (19.4% vs. 54.4%, p < 0.001). Among patients who received surgery, Black patients had higher cross-sectional abscess area on CT (6.4 ± 8.4 cm2  > vs. 3.8 ± 3.3 cm2 , p = 0.014), longer length of stay (5.4 ± 3.3 days vs. 3.2 ± 1.5, p < 0.001), and longer time between admission and surgery (2.3 ± 2.1 vs. 0.83 ± 1.1, p < 0.001). Increased ADI was correlated with increased rate of trismus.

CONCLUSIONS

Lower rates of pre-admission antibiotics and larger abscess area on CT imaging among Black patients may suggest disparities in access to primary care, resulting in presentation to tertiary care at later stages of disease and higher rates of medical management trial prior to surgical intervention.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 (retrospective cohort study) Laryngoscope, 134:1907-1912, 2024.

Allyship to Advance Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in Otolaryngology: What We Can All Do

Purpose of review

To summarize the current literature on allyship, providing a historical perspective, concept analysis, and practical steps to advance equity, diversity, and inclusion. This review also provides evidence-based tools to foster allyship and identifies potential pitfalls.

Recent findings

Allies in healthcare advocate for inclusive and equitable practices that benefit patients, coworkers, and learners. Allyship requires working in solidarity with individuals from underrepresented or historically marginalized groups to promote a sense of belonging and opportunity. New technologies present possibilities and perils in paving the pathway to diversity.

Summary

Unlocking the power of allyship requires that allies confront unconscious biases, engage in self-reflection, and act as effective partners. Using an allyship toolbox, allies can foster psychological safety in personal and professional spaces while avoiding missteps. Allyship incorporates goals, metrics, and transparent data reporting to promote accountability and to sustain improvements. Implementing these allyship strategies in solidarity holds promise for increasing diversity and inclusion in the specialty.

Healthcare Disparities in Otolaryngology

Purpose of Review

The purpose of this review is to summarize some of the recent research studies on healthcare disparities across various subspecialties within otolaryngology. This review also highlights the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on disparities and proposes potential interventions to mitigate disparities.

Recent Findings

Significant healthcare disparities in care and treatment outcomes have been reported across all areas of otolaryngology. Notable differences in survival, disease recurrence, and overall mortality have been noted based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), insurance status, etc. This is most well-researched in head and neck cancer (HNC) within otolaryngology.

Summary

Healthcare disparities have been identified by numerous research studies within otolaryngology for many vulnerable groups that include racial and ethnic minority groups, low-income populations, and individuals from rural areas among many others. These populations continue to experience suboptimal access to timely, quality otolaryngologic care that exacerbate disparities in health outcomes.

Climate change, the environment, and rhinologic disease

BACKGROUND

The escalating negative impact of climate change on our environment has the potential to result in significant morbidity of rhinologic diseases.

METHODS

Evidence based review of examples of rhinologic diseases including allergic and nonallergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, and allergic fungal rhinosinusitis was performed.

RESULTS

The lower socioeconomic population, including historically oppressed groups, will be disproportionately affected.

CONCLUSIONS

We need a systematic approach to improve healthcare database infrastructure and funding to promote diverse scientific collaboration to address these healthcare needs.

The Use of Race and Socioeconomic Status Variables in Published Otolaryngologic Research

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the use of race and socioeconomic status (SES) variables in clinical otolarynogologic research.

METHODS

Databases were queried for all articles published in 2016 issues of 5 major otolaryngologic journals. One thousand, one hundred and forty of 1593 articles abstracted met inclusion criteria for analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 244 (21.4%) studies specified race as a variable. The subspecialty of Head and Neck cancer specified race at statistically higher rates compared to other subspecialties (P = .002). Two hundred nine (34.0%) domestic studies specified race compared to 35 (6.7%) international studies. Of the 244 studies that specified race, 79 (32.4%) defined race using racial and ethnic categories interchangeably. Two hundred twenty-four (91.8%) studies reported data by race, 145 (59.4%) analyzed the data, and 112 (45.9%) discussed race-based results.In total, 94 (8.2%) studies specified SES. All subspecialties specified SES at statistically similar rates. Seventy (11.4%) domestic studies specified SES compared to 24 (4.6%) international studies. Of the 94 studies that specified SES, 42 (44.7%) defined SES using insurance status, 35 (37.2%) used education, and 32 (34.0%) used income. Seventy-eight (83.0%) studies reported data by SES, 71 (75.5%) analyzed the data, and 68 (72.3%) discussed SES-based results.

CONCLUSION

In clinical otolaryngologic research, the study of race and SES is limited. To improve quality of research and patient care for all patients, investigators should clearly justify their use of race and SES variables, carefully select their measures of race and SES (if the use of these variables is justified), and study race/SES-based data beyond just a superficial level.

An Otolaryngologist's Guide to Understanding the H-index and How It Could Affect Your Future Career

Objectives

The h-index is a measure of research output and contribution that shows strong correlation with academic promotion in medicine. The purpose of this article is to clearly explain how h-index scores are calculated and how otolaryngologists can effectively and advantageously use these scores for their career development.

Data Sources

PubMed.

Review Methods

We performed an up-to-date PubMed literature review describing the design of the h-index and how to use it effectively along with its role in academic medicine, including otolaryngology.

Conclusions

H-index scores are used as a metric for scientific output that considers the number of publications and the number of times each is cited. Search engines can automatically calculate h-index scores for one's work. Studies also revealed significant positive correlations that the h-index has from fellowship involvement, which could be beneficial for career advancement in academic medicine.

Implications for Practice

Aspiring academic otolaryngologists should create a research profile to link and calculate the h-index for publications, submit to well-read high-impact journals for increased viewership and citations, and expand on foundational and personal research topics. Future studies should evaluate faculty and resident awareness of h-indices in the otolaryngology department to see how we can further address any underlying barriers. Otolaryngologists with the knowledge and tools necessary to maximize h-index scores and produce high-quality research in modern-day medicine not only provide potential advantages in career development but also bring significant contribution to the field of otolaryngology and patient care.